places, they certainly did not in others ; and, where they did not, they must be understood as compre- hending all, whether infants or adults : and therefore the language of our Liturgy, which is not a whit stronger than theirs, may be both subscribed and used without any just occasion of offence.
Let me then speak the truth before God : Though I am no Arminian, I do think that the refinements of Calvin have done great harm in the Church : they have driven multitudes from the plain and popular way of speaking used by the inspired writers, and have made them unreasonably and unscripturally squeamish in their modes of expression ; and I conceive that, the less addicted any person is to systematic accuracy, the more he will accord with the inspired writers, and the more he will approve of the views of our Reformers. I do not mean however to say, that a slight alteration in two or three instances would not be an improvement ; sines it would take off a burthen from many minds, and supersede the necessity of laboured explanations : but I do mean to say, that there is no such objection to these expressions as to deter any conscientious person from giving his unfeigned assent and consent to the Liturgy altogether, or from using the parti- cular expressions which we have been endeavouring to explain.
The other objection is, That the use of a Liturgy necessarily generates formality.
We have before acknowledged that the repetition of a form is less likely to arrest the attention, than that which is novel : but we by no means concede that it necessarily generates formality : on the con- trary, we affirm, that if any person come to the service of the Church with a truly spiritual mind, he will find in our Liturgy what is calculated to call forth the devoutest exercises of his mind, far more than in any of the extemporaneous prayers which he would hear in other places.
We forbear to enter into a fuller elucidation of this point at present, because we should detain you
s2